David Church

Dr. David Church


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

21Years (2006-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 June 2015 in Laboratory Investigation
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ESEllen Stelloo
Ellen Stelloo
TBTjalling Bosse
Tjalling Bosse
RNRemi A Nout
Remi A Nout
HMHelen J MacKay
Helen J MacKay
DCDavid Church
David Church
CCCarien L Creutzberg
Carien L Creutzberg

12 December 2019 in The Journal of Pathology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ALAlicia León‐Castillo
Alicia León‐Castillo
HBHeidi Britton
Heidi Britton
MMMelissa K. McConechy
Melissa K. McConechy
JMJessica N. McAlpine
Jessica N. McAlpine
RNRemi Nout
Remi Nout
CGC. Blake Gilks
C. Blake Gilks
Pathogenic somatic missense mutations within the DNA polymerase epsilon (POLE) exonuclease domain define the important subtype of ultramutated tumours (‘POLE‐ultramutated’) within the novel molecular classification of endometrial carcinoma (EC). However, clinical implementation of this classifier requires systematic evaluation of the pathogenicity of POLE mutations. To address this, we examined base changes, tumour mutational burden (TMB), DNA microsatellite instability (MSI) status, POLE variant frequency, and the results from six in silico tools on 82 ECs with whole‐exome sequencing from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). Of these, 41 had one of five known pathogenic POLE exonuclease domain mutations (EDM) and showed characteristic genomic alterations: C>A substitution > 20%, T>G substitutions > 4%, C>G substitutions < 0.6%, indels < 5%, TMB > 100 mut/Mb. A scoring system to assess these alterations (POLE‐score) was developed; based on their scores, 7/18 (39%) additional tumours with EDM were classified as POLE‐ultramutated ECs, and the six POLE mutations present in these tumours were considered pathogenic. Only 1/23 (4%) tumours with non‐EDM showed these genomic alterations, indicating that a large majority of mutations outside the exonuclease domain are not pathogenic. The infrequent combination of MSI‐H with POLE EDM led us to investigate the clinical significance of this association. Tumours with pathogenic POLE EDM co‐existent with MSI‐H showed genomic alterations characteristic of POLE‐ultramutated ECs. In a pooled analysis of 3361 ECs, 13 ECs with DNA mismatch repair deficiency (MMRd)/MSI‐H and a pathogenic POLE EDM had a 5‐year recurrence‐free survival (RFS) of 92.3%, comparable to previously reported POLE‐ultramutated ECs. Additionally, 14 cases with non‐pathogenic POLE EDM and MMRd/MSI‐H had a 5‐year RFS of 76.2%, similar to MMRd/MSI‐H, POLE wild‐type ECs, suggesting that these should be categorised as MMRd, rather than POLE‐ultramutated ECs for prognostication. This work provides guidance on classification of ECs with POLE mutations, facilitating implementation of POLE testing in routine clinical care. © 2019 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

12 December 2019 in The Journal of Pathology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ALAlicia León‐Castillo
Alicia León‐Castillo
EGEster Gilvazquez
Ester Gilvazquez
RNRemi Nout
Remi Nout
VSVincent T.H.B.M. Smit
Vincent T.H.B.M. Smit
JMJessica N. McAlpine
Jessica N. McAlpine
TBTjalling Bosse
Tjalling Bosse
Endometrial carcinoma (EC) molecular classification based on four molecular subclasses identified in The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) has gained relevance in recent years due to its prognostic utility and potential to predict benefit from adjuvant treatment. While most ECs can be classified based on a single classifier (POLE exonuclease domain mutations – POLEmut, MMR deficiency – MMRd, p53 abnormal – p53abn), a small but clinically relevant group of tumours harbour more than one molecular classifying feature and are referred to as ‘multiple‐classifier’ ECs. We aimed to describe the clinicopathological and molecular features of multiple‐classifier ECs with abnormal p53 (p53abn). Within a cohort of 3518 molecularly profiled ECs, 107 (3%) tumours displayed p53abn in addition to another classifier(s), including 64 with MMRd (MMRd–p53abn), 31 with POLEmut (POLEmut–p53abn), and 12 with all three aberrations (MMRd–POLEmut–p53abn). MMRd–p53abn ECs and POLEmut–p53abn ECs were mostly grade 3 endometrioid ECs, early stage, and frequently showed morphological features characteristic of MMRd or POLEmut ECs. 18/28 (60%) MMRd–p53abn ECs and 7/15 (46.7%) POLEmut–p53abn ECs showed subclonal p53 overexpression, suggesting that TP53 mutation was a secondary event acquired during tumour progression. Hierarchical clustering of TCGA ECs by single nucleotide variant (SNV) type and somatic copy number alterations (SCNAs) revealed that MMRd–p53abn tumours mostly clustered with single‐classifier MMRd tumours (20/23) rather than single‐classifier p53abn tumours (3/23), while POLEmut–p53abn tumours mostly clustered with single‐classifier POLEmut tumours (12/13) and seldom with single‐classifier p53abn tumours (1/13) (both p ≤ 0.001, chi‐squared test). Finally, the clinical outcome of patients with MMRd–p53abn and POLEmut–p53abn ECs [stage I 5‐year recurrence‐free survival (RFS) of 92.2% and 94.1%, respectively] was significantly different from single‐classifier p53abn EC (stage I RFS 70.8%, p = 0.024 and p = 0.050, respectively). Our results support the classification of MMRd–p53abn EC as MMRd and POLEmut–p53abn EC as POLEmut. © 2019 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

29 January 2016 in Nature Reviews Cancer
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
EREmily Rayner
Emily Rayner
IGInge C. van Gool
Inge C. van Gool
Claire PallesClaire Palles
Claire Palles
SKStephen E. Kearsey
Stephen E. Kearsey
TBTjalling Bosse
Tjalling Bosse
DCDavid Church
David Church

24 March 2013 in Human Molecular Genetics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DCDavid Church
David Church
SBSarah E.W. Briggs
Sarah E.W. Briggs
Claire PallesClaire Palles
Claire Palles
EDEnric Domingo
Enric Domingo
SKStephen J. Kearsey
Stephen J. Kearsey
ITIan P.M. Tomlinson
Ian P.M. Tomlinson
Accurate duplication of DNA prior to cell division is essential to suppress mutagenesis and tumour development. The high fidelity of eukaryotic DNA replication is due to a combination of accurate incorporation of nucleotides into the nascent DNA strand by DNA polymerases, the recognition and removal of mispaired nucleotides (proofreading) by the exonuclease activity of DNA polymerases δ and ɛ, and post-replication surveillance and repair of newly synthesized DNA by the mismatch repair (MMR) apparatus. While the contribution of defective MMR to neoplasia is well recognized, evidence that faulty DNA polymerase activity is important in cancer development has been limited. We have recently shown that germline POLE and POLD1 exonuclease domain mutations (EDMs) predispose to colorectal cancer (CRC) and, in the latter case, to endometrial cancer (EC). Somatic POLE mutations also occur in 5–10% of sporadic CRCs and underlie a hypermutator, microsatellite-stable molecular phenotype. We hypothesized that sporadic ECs might also acquire somatic POLE and/or POLD1 mutations. Here, we have found that missense POLE EDMs with good evidence of pathogenic effects are present in 7% of a set of 173 endometrial cancers, although POLD1 EDMs are uncommon. The POLE mutations localized to highly conserved residues and were strongly predicted to affect proofreading. Consistent with this, POLE-mutant tumours were hypermutated, with a high frequency of base substitutions, and an especially large relative excess of G:C>T:A transversions. All POLE EDM tumours were microsatellite stable, suggesting that defects in either DNA proofreading or MMR provide alternative mechanisms to achieve genomic instability and tumourigenesis.

13 October 2016 in Annals of Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ESE. Stelloo
E. Stelloo
AJA. M. L. Jansen
A. M. L. Jansen
EOE. M. Osse
E. M. Osse
RNR. A. Nout
R. A. Nout
CCC. L. Creutzberg
C. L. Creutzberg
TBTjalling Bosse
Tjalling Bosse
Mismatch repair (MMR)-deficiency analysis is increasingly recommended for all endometrial cancers, as it identifies Lynch syndrome patients, and is emerging as a prognostic classifier to guide adjuvant treatment. The aim of this study was to define the optimal approach for MMR-deficiency testing and to clarify discrepancies between microsatellite instability (MSI) analysis and immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis of MMR protein expression. Six hundred ninety- six endometrial cancers were analyzed for MSI (pentaplex panel) and MMR protein expression (IHC). Agreement between methodologies was calculated using Cohen’s Kappa. MLH1 promoter hypermethylation, dinucleotide microsatellite markers and somatic MMR and POLE exonuclease domain (EDM) gene variants (using next-generation/Sanger sequencing) were analyzed in discordant cases. MSI was found in 180 patients. Complete loss of expression of one or more MMR proteins was observed in 196 cases. A PMS2- and MSH6-antibody panel detected all cases with loss of MMR protein expression. The results of MSI and MMR protein expression were concordant in 655/696 cases (kappa = 0.854, P < 0.001). Ambiguous cases (n = 41, 6%) included: subclonal loss of MMR protein expression (n = 18), microsatellite stable or MSI-low cases with loss of MMR protein expression (n = 20), and MSI-low or MSI-high cases with retained MMR protein expression (n = 3). Most of these cases could be explained by MLH1 promoter hypermethylation. Five of seven cases with solitary loss of PMS2 or MSH6 protein expression carried somatic gene variants. Two MSI-high cases with retained MMR protein expression carried a POLE-EDM variant. MSI and IHC analysis are highly concordant in endometrial cancer. This holds true for cases with subclonal loss of MMR protein expression. Discordant MMR-proficient/MSI-high cases (<1%), may be explained by POLE-EDM variants.